2008 Woodie Awards
Protect the press
Issue date: 9/1/06 Section: Opinion
From Big Tobacco to domestic spying to Abu Ghraib, the role of the press to act as a check against industry and government abuse is becoming increasingly critical. Ensuring that journalists are free to conduct this important task requires certain privileges, including the right to protect the identity of their sources if necessary.
Forty-nine states, including California, have shield laws that protect source confidentiality, though similar laws do not yet exist at the federal level. In light of the propensity of journalist-source confidentiality cases currently in dispute, we feel that the time has arrived to enact appropriate legislation.
Fortunately, there are bills in the House and the Senate that would create the desired laws, though each is bogged in committees expressing national security issues. While security is everyone's concern, the public is best served when the press is able to report breakthrough news without having to fear for retaliation to its sources.
The proposed laws do not create carte blanche exceptions to the press, as some conditions would still require journalists to reveal their sources. Instead, they set guidelines requiring that the government first investigate every conceivable angle, and demonstrate that the information unveiled would provide a greater public service.
While the baseball steroid scandal is not a national security issue, it is no less an important story. Statistics reveal that steroid use among high school students doubled from 1998 to 2003---around the time news articles were reporting undetectable steroid use among professional athletes. The problem is so severe that Congress has intervened and even President Bush referred to it in his 2006 State of the Union speech.
Prosecutors are attacking the matter the way they handle other drug investigations, by granting immunity to users who testify against suppliers. Unfortunately, this approach does little to discourage professional athletes from using steroids, and it permits those athletes to get away with cheating and lying to us, their fans.
The Chronicle reporters who broke this story were faced with an ethical dilemma, as their source material came from sealed Grand Jury testimony. Given the nature of the issue, we would have made the same decision to print the story, even if it meant facing jail time to protect the source.
Attorney-client privilege is a Sixth Amendment guarantee and a cornerstone of our judicial system. Journalists deserve similar protection.
Forty-nine states, including California, have shield laws that protect source confidentiality, though similar laws do not yet exist at the federal level. In light of the propensity of journalist-source confidentiality cases currently in dispute, we feel that the time has arrived to enact appropriate legislation.
Fortunately, there are bills in the House and the Senate that would create the desired laws, though each is bogged in committees expressing national security issues. While security is everyone's concern, the public is best served when the press is able to report breakthrough news without having to fear for retaliation to its sources.
The proposed laws do not create carte blanche exceptions to the press, as some conditions would still require journalists to reveal their sources. Instead, they set guidelines requiring that the government first investigate every conceivable angle, and demonstrate that the information unveiled would provide a greater public service.
While the baseball steroid scandal is not a national security issue, it is no less an important story. Statistics reveal that steroid use among high school students doubled from 1998 to 2003---around the time news articles were reporting undetectable steroid use among professional athletes. The problem is so severe that Congress has intervened and even President Bush referred to it in his 2006 State of the Union speech.
Prosecutors are attacking the matter the way they handle other drug investigations, by granting immunity to users who testify against suppliers. Unfortunately, this approach does little to discourage professional athletes from using steroids, and it permits those athletes to get away with cheating and lying to us, their fans.
The Chronicle reporters who broke this story were faced with an ethical dilemma, as their source material came from sealed Grand Jury testimony. Given the nature of the issue, we would have made the same decision to print the story, even if it meant facing jail time to protect the source.
Attorney-client privilege is a Sixth Amendment guarantee and a cornerstone of our judicial system. Journalists deserve similar protection.
Be the first to comment on this story